EU kids online report

So

ni
a
EU d K Liv
Ki jar ing
ds ta
s
O n Ó ton
nl
e
in laf , L
s
e
e
N son sli
et
e
w , w Ha
or it
h dd
k
m on
em ,
be Ank
rs
e
of Gö
th rz
ig
e

an

EU Kids Online aims to enhance knowledge of the
experiences and practices of European children and parents
regarding risky and safer use of the internet and new online
technologies, in order to inform the promotion of a safer
online environment for children.

CONTENTS
Knowledge enhancement 1

Newer risks 28

Executive summary 2

Comparing risk and harm 30

Project director’s introduction 4

How children cope with harm 32

The European Commission’s safer internet programme 6

What parents do when children go online 34

EU Kids Online news 8

Who supports children– parents, teachers and peers 36

Europe and beyond 10

Inequalities in risk and resources to cope 38

How children go online 12

Similarities and differences in online experiences 40

What children do online 14

Top 10 myths about children’s online risks 42

Risky opportunities 16

Recommendations 44

Social networking 18

The survey 46

What upsets children online 20

Partners in Russia and Australia 48

Sexual content 22

The network 50

Online bullying 24

Network members 52

Meeting new contacts online 26

KNOWLEDGE ENHANCEMENT
From 2009-11 we designed a detailed survey to interview 25,000
European children and their parents in 25 countries.
Building on our 2006-09 review of existing methods and ﬁndings, this past year has
brought a focus on survey analysis and dissemination. From 2011-14, we will extend
our work with researchers and stakeholders to maximise the value of and insights
from the available evidence.

EU

KIDS
OPPORTUNITIES
RISKS

ONLINE

RIGOROUS METHODS UNDERPIN OUR RESEARCH
EU KIDS ONLINE FINAL REPORT • 1

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
survey
Kids Online
The EU
a unique,
s conducted

ha
ar
nline network
with 9-16 ye
rvey in homes
ildren
-to-face su
ch
detailed, face
tries; 25,142
om 25 coun
g 2010.
rnet users fr
old inte
rviewed durin
nts were inte
nd their pare
a
ce base
orous eviden
to provide a rig
ise
as
• The purpose w lders in their efforts to maxim
akeho
risk of harm
to support st
inimising the
ities while m
rtun
online oppo
se.
ith internet u
associated w

• The EU Kids O

Going onlin
e is thorou
ghly
embedded
in children’s
lives
• Internet use is

increasingly
individualised
and mobile:
, privatised
9-16 year o
ld internet u
minutes per
sers spend
day online,
88
on average.
• 49 per cent g
o online in th
eir bedroom
go online vi
, 33 per cen
a a mobile
t
phone or h
and most use
andheld de
the internet
vice,
at home (87
school (63 p
per cent) an
er cent).
d

Opportunities and risks online
go hand in hand
• Efforts to increase opportunities may also increase
risks, while efforts to reduce risks may restrict children’s
opportunities. A careful balancing act, which recognises
children’s online experiences “in the round”, is vital.

•

Risky opportunities allow children to experiment
o
online with relationships, intimacy and identity. This
is vital for growing up if children are to learn to cope
w
with the adult world.

• But risky opportunities are linked to vulnerability as well
as resilience, depending on both the design of the online
a
environment, and on the child and their circumstances.
e
• Social networking sites (SNSs) enable children to
c
communicate and have fun with their friends, but not
e
everyone has the digital skills to manage privacy and
p
personal disclosure and many 9-12 year olds use
S
SNSs underage, including 20 per cent on Facebook
a
and 38 per cent using SNSs overall.

e beneﬁts
ll gain all th
Not a
earliest and
they take up

ities
in which activ
y practise,
activities the
bination of
quarter,
the com
which only a
they vary in
portunities in
ladder of op
vanced and
resulting in a
h the most ad
children, reac
nger
and few you
.
creative step
’ that ‘there
y it is ‘very true
6 year olds sa
9-1
for children
at are good
• 44 per cent of
e internet th
with
ings on th
less satisﬁed
are lots of th
children are
gh younger
say this.
s
ou
9-10 year old
of my age’, th
4 per cent of
vision: only 3
e
online pro
s of SES, ag
persist in term
rcome
digital skills
efforts to ove
• Inequalities in
e, gender, so
proved
lesser degre
lies in the im
and, to a
f the solution
ded; part o
these are nee
rfaces.
tools and inte
of end-user
design

• Children vary

2 • EU KIDS ONLINE FINAL REPORT

Parental m
ediation c
an help
• Pa

rents recog
nise that it is
valuable for
with their c
them to en
hild’s intern
gage
et use, and
range of str
they emplo
ategies, de
y a wide
pending pa
child. But s
rtly on the
ome paren
age of the
ts do not d
young child
o very muc
ren, and th
h, even for
ere are so
not want th
me childre
eir parents
n who do
to take mo
re interest.
• Children are
generally p
ositive abo
actions, alt
ut their pa
hough a th
rents’
ird says th
what their
ey sometim
parents s
es ignore
ay about
Parents w
using the
ho practis
internet.
e more re
have child
strictive re
ren who e
gulation
ncounter
harm – bu
fewer risk
t also few
s and less
er online o
pportunitie
s.

Children en
counter a r
ange of on
• 12 per cent o
line risks
f European 9
-16 year o
been

bothered or up
lds say that
they have
set by somet
• 50 per cent o
hing on the in
children do n
ternet – but m
ot report bein
f 11-16 year
ost the inte
olds “find it ea
g bothered o
rnet”, helpin
r upset by go
sier to be mys
• Exposure to se
g to explain
ing online. o
elf on
why 30 per ce
xual images
nline with so
occurs offline
nt have conta
meone they
for some ch
as well as onl
ct
haven’t met
ildren and in
ine, but 9 per cent have m
face-to-face.
some countr
more childre
et an online
But only
ies it is spread
n who go on
contact offlin
ing online; found this a pro
line via a per
e, and very
blematic exp
sexual images
sonal device
few
erience.
or received se
have seen • P
xual messag
ublic anxiety
es.
often focuses
• Half of online
on pornograp
and meeting
bullies say th
hy, “sexting”,
strangers, es
ey have also
to-face, and
bullying
pecially for yo
bullied peop
half of online
ung children
le face- are other risks that w
bullying victim
. But there
orry children
face-to-face;
s have been
, including m
also, among
bullied especially those associ
any teenager
those who ha
nearly half hav
ated with use
s,
ve bullied oth
e themselves
r-generated
ers online,
content.
been bullied
online.

Countries can be grouped into
four categories
• “Lower use, lower risk” countries (Austria, Belgium,
France, Germany, Greece, Italy, Hungary).

• “Lower use, some risk” countries (Ireland, Portugal,
Sp
Spain, Turkey).

ed
tinguish
st be dis
Risk mu
m
cy and
self-effica
from har
higher in
(ie,
r,

ities
olde
line activ
who are
• Children king, who do more on ies) and who
unit
see
of opport
sensation
r more
e ladder
th
encounte
higher on
problems
are
ological
re psych
have mo
nline.
fficacy
ll kinds o
er in self-e
risks of a
nger, low
ou
ities,
who are y
nline activ
t children
o fewer o
d
• Bu
ological
king, who
ore psych
ation see
o have m
and sens
wh
setting.
skills, and
ful and up
ore harm
ve fewer
ha
risks m
o
acity to
find online
ren’s cap
problems
o
for
port child
up
ce
rtant to s
g resilien
• It is impo lves, thereby buildin nd, followed
a frie
mse
often tell
cope the
them,
Children
e upsets
ens.
igital citiz
thing onlin
n
d
line,
me
tegies on
when so
ctive stra
a parent,
by
d
of pro-a
hildren
c
e
nd some
try a rang
.
ys work a
and they
nline harm
on’t alwa
se d
s to o
ough the
response
th
in their
fatalistic
are more

• “Higher use, some risk” countries (Cyprus, Finland,
th
the Netherlands, Poland, Slovenia, the UK).

• “Higher use, higher risk” countries (Bulgaria, the
Cz
Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Lithuania, Norway,
Ro
Romania, Sweden), where the Eastern European
co
countries are better called, “New use, new risk”.

• A country’s socio-economic stratification, regulatory
fra
framework, technological infrastructure and
ed
educational system all shape children’s online risks.

• High internet use in a country is rarely associated with
low risk; and high risk is rarely associated with low use;
ra
rather, across countries, the more use, the more risk.
ather,

Conclusion
s
• The report co
ncludes by
debunking th
of children a
e top 10 myt
nd online ris
hs
k.
• It then offers a
series of evid
ence-based
to governmen
recommend
ts, industry,
ations
parents, edu
raisers, civil so
cators, awar
ciety bodies,
enesschild welfare
children them
organisation
selves.
s and

More information
EU Kids Online reports, all questionnaires and technical survey information, and the dataset
nd
dataset
t
bl from www.eukidsonline.net
kid
li
t
(cross-tabulations, raw data files) are available f

KEY FINDINGS AND CONCLUSIONS

PROJECT DIRECTOR’S
INTRODUCTION
Families live complex and diverse lives. The EU Kids Online
model includes multiple factors that, together, shape children’s
experience of the internet.

Context
Demographic

• The rapidity with which children and young people are gaining
access to online, convergent, mobile and networked media is
unprecedented in the history of technological innovation.

Psychological

• Parents, teachers and children are acquiring, learning to
use and ﬁnding a purpose for the internet in their daily lives.

•

Stakeholders – governments, schools, industry, child
welfare, civil society and families – aim to maximise online
opportunities while minimising the risk of harm associated
with internet use.

INDIVIDUAL USER

• To inform this effort, a rigorous evidence base is vital.
SOCIAL MEDIATION
The EU Kids Online model

Socio-economic
stratiﬁcation

• Our approach is comparative, child-centred and contextualised.
• It recognises that, since not all children encounter risk, and
since not all risks result in harm, research must identify the
protective factors (eg, coping) which reduce the probability
of harm and the risk factors which increase it.

• Our research traces the path of children’s online experiences
from internet use (amount, devices, location) through online
activities (opportunities, skills, risky practices) to the risks
encountered online and then the outcomes experienced
(whether harmful or not, how children cope).


At the social level, parents, school
and peers all play a role in mediating
children’s internet risk and safety

We recognise the many opportunities the internet affords
children even when examining the risks
We focus on four main risks: seeing sexual images,
receiving sexual messages, being bullied, meeting
online contacts offline

As individuals, children vary in age, gender,
socio-economic status and according to their
psychological strengths and vulnerabilities

Harm is assessed by the child’s
self-report of how bothered or upset
they felt, and coping is assessed by
asking the child what they did, on
encountering a particular risk

Some activites are beneficial
and some are harmful but
often it depends on the child
and his/her context

Usage

Activities

Parents

Harm or
coping

Risk factors

School

Peers
Child as unit of analysis

Regulatory
framework

Technological
infrastructure

Education
system

Cultural
values
Country as unit of analysis

At the country level, children’s online
experiences are shaped by a range of factors,
and each contributes to interpreting the
comparison of findings across 25 countries

Professor Sonia Livingstone
The London School of Economics
and Political Science

BUILDING AN EVIDENCE BASE FOR POLICY

THE EUROPEAN COMMISSION’S
SAFER INTERNET PROGRAMME
“The European Commission is strongly committed to making the Internet a place where children of
all ages can exploit all the opportunities the technologies offer – safely. Through the Safer Internet
Programme, for example, we fund Safer Internet Centres in 30 countries, support the annual Safer
Internet Day and Safer Internet Forum and bring together stakeholders like NGOs, industry and
law enforcement.
We also recognise that actions to support the empowerment of children and develop a safe
online environment depend on robust knowledge about children and how they use online
services. EU Kids Online has over the past years provided the European Commission and
the Safer Internet Programme with information that gives essential insights into new trends
in the use of online technologies and their consequences for children’s lives. The knowledge we gain from the research
y
p
g
g
carried out by EU Kids Online and other p j
projects is critical for discussions on upcoming challenges and new initiatives.”
on
Pat Manson
t,
Head of Unit, EC Safer Internet Programme

The EC Safer Internet Programme was the core funder for the
project. Additionally, Finnish participation was funded by the
Finnish Ministries of Education and Culture and of Transport
and Communications, and several national teams received
additional funding from a range of sources.


The European Commission is strongly committed to making the Internet a place
where children of all ages can exploit all the opportunities the technologies offer – safely

EU Kids Online has been delighted to work with many other
partners, colleagues and stakeholders around Europe and
beyond. We thank the several hundred stakeholders who
responded to our consultations during the EU Kids Online
project, guiding its design and the use of its findings.

“Awareness-raising is a complex process, dependent on
the quality of research data available. For this reason,
the Insafe network of safer internet awareness raising
centres works closely with the EU Kids Online project.
Their survey findings have refined our knowledge of what
young people are doing online, their parents’ perception
of this, and the skills they lack in dealing with the risks
they encounter. Through the project we have gained
insight into the cultural differences between the countries
we are dealing with, and how these impact on online
risk-handling.
Without a project such as EU Kids Online, the awareness
raisers in the Insafe network could not target their audience
as accurately or measure the potential impact of their
campaigns. EU Kids Online has proven an invaluable partner
over the past years, a partnership we hope will continue for
the years to come.”
Janice Richardson
Insafe and European Schoolnet

EMPOWERING AND PROTECTING CHILDREN ONLINE

EU KIDS ONLINE NEWS

Before we take a closer look at our project ﬁndings, here’s
some recent highlights from the network.

01

Our research cited by the
EC Vice President

“Research shows that children are going online younger and
younger, and that age restrictions on social networking sites are
often ignored. Younger children may not be aware of the risks
they face, nor of how they can change their privacy settings,”
said Neelie Kroes, Vice President of the European Commission
and European Digital Agenda Commissioner, in her keynote to
the 2011 Digital Agenda Assembly. Given this, she argued for
industry self-regulation as part of a comprehensive framework
“to empower children and parents with tools… that are simple,
universally recognisable and effective”.


02

Internet Governance
Forum

In “A grand coalition on child internet safety”, a pre-meeting
organised by the European NGO Alliance for Child Safety
Online, eNACSO, at the IGF 2010 Forum in Vilnius, Sonia
Livingstone chaired a lively discussion about the evidence
base to support international efforts to further child internet
safety. At the 2011 Forum in Nairobi, Brian O’Neill and
Gitte Stald from EU Kids Online will present in the panel,
“Challenging myths about young people and the internet”,
with the Dynamic Youth Coalition on
Internet Governance.

All our reports, materials and data are online at www.eukidsonline.net

03

European Award for Best
Children’s Online Content

Increasing online opportunities is a great way to minimise
encounters with risk, EU Kids Online has argued, especially
in countries where there is little dedicated positive content
for children. Thus we were delighted when Sonia Livingstone
was invited to chair the European Jury for this award. She
announced the prizes at the 2011 Digital Agenda Assembly
in Brussels, which were presented by Commissioner Neelie
Kroes on 17 June.

05
04

Contacts, presentations
and media coverage

In the past two years, the EU Kids Online network has
made 142 public/stakeholder presentations, 218 research
presentations and has published 138 articles and chapters.
Our mailing list includes some 1,545 people from many
countries worldwide. We’ve had 42,688 unique website
visitors in the past year. And our research has been mentioned
in 740 media reports so far.

International conference

Over 40 papers will be presented by researchers from 20+
countries at the September 2011 EU Kids Online conference
held at the London School of Economics and Political Science.
Entitled “Children, risk and safety online: Research and policy
challenges in comparative perspective”, the conference
materials are posted at www.eukidsonline.net

06

New book: Children,
risk and safety online

The EU Kids Online network is collaborating
on a new book, edited by Sonia Livingstone,
Leslie Haddon and Anke Görzig, to be
published by Policy Press (Bristol) in summer
2012. With a discussion of all the ﬁndings
and lots of new analysis, it is intended for
researchers and policy makers.

INFORMING, NETWORKING, ENGAGING
NGAGING

EUROPE AND BEYOND

The “Europe” of EU Kids Online is not the EU27. The map shows
our 25 participating countries, encompassing Europe’s diversity.
In the next phase of work we will include Croatia, Iceland, Latvia,
Luxembourg, Malta, Russia, Slovakia and Switzerland.
To gain a wider perspective, and to see Europe
from the outside as well as from within, we
collaborate with researchers from:

USA
We work with The Pew Research
Center’s Internet and American
Life Project and The Crimes Against Children Research
Center, University of New Hampshire to keep in touch with
their parallel projects.

“The Pew Research Center has looked to the EU Kids Online
safety work for rigorously tested questions for us to repeat
in our surveys to assess the American experience. We look
forward to comparing the trends in the US and European
contexts in online safety experiences and behaviors. EU Kids
Online is an enormously valuable resource, to its European
constituents and to those of us concerned with rigorously
researching kids safety in other countries as well.”

Russia
The EU Kids Online survey has
been applied by colleagues from
the Moscow State University; see page 48 for ﬁndings.

Australia
The EU Kids Online survey has
been applied by colleagues from
the Centre of Excellence for Creative Industries and Innovation;
see page 48 for ﬁndings.

Brazil
We are working with the Brazilian
Network Information Center to
pilot the possibility of conducting the EU Kids Online survey.

Amanda Lenhart
Senior Research Specialist, Pew

“The EU Kids Online study is an impressive example of
cross-national comparative research, conducted in a very
collaborative but methodologically sound and sophisticated
way. It will serve as a model for future social science. The
fruits of this effort are only just beginning to be harvested,
and there will be much more coming out of it in the future.”
Professor David Finkelhor
Crimes against Children Research Center,
University of New Hampshire


In comparative research, it is important
to recognise similarities across countries
as well as differences within countries

Years since 50 per cent
internet use = 6+

internet use = 3-5

internet use = 0-2

FI
I
SE

79%

74%

NO

78%
EE
E

62%
76%

IE
IE

DK
K

LT

54%
K
UK

50%

69%
NL
BE
BE

77
77%
7%

63%

51%

PL

E
DE

65%
CZ

R
FR

58%

AT
T

HU

57%
56%

49%

SI
I

51%

RO

24%
PT

46%

IT

39%

ES

26%

BG

51%

26%

TR

EL
L

33%

47%

GDP per capita per year:

Low

Medium

High

CY

54%

% households using
broadband connection

COMMONALITY AND DIVERSITY WITHIN EUROPE

HOW CHILDREN GO ONLINE

Going online is now thoroughly embedded in children’s daily lives.
Going online is increasingly privatised. The graph below shows
the percentage of children who access the internet either via a
mobile or handheld device or via access in the child’s bedroom.
Depending on country circumstances, different contexts for
privatised use are found across Europe.

the average minutes online
per day for 9-16 year olds.
15-16 year olds spend 118
minutes online per day, twice as long as
9-10 year olds (58 minutes).

Almost as many parents as children in a country use the internet
daily (see graph opposite), suggesting they are gaining online
experience along with their children; the more this happens, the
more effectively parents can mediate their children’s internet use.

the average age of ﬁrst internet use
in Denmark and Sweden, rising to
eight in other Northern European
countries and nine for Europe overall.

•

60 per cent of 9-16 year old internet users in Europe go
online daily, and a further 33 per cent go online at least weekly.

• Fewer parents use the internet daily – 49 per cent – and
24 per cent don’t use it at all.

the percentage who go online
in their bedroom.

• In countries where parents are more likely to use the internet
daily, children are also more likely to do so – and vice versa.

33 per cent go online via a
mobile phone or handheld device, and most
use the internet at home (87 per cent) then
at school (63 per cent).

• Usage is highest in the Nordic countries, and lowest in
Southern Europe.
• The more a parent uses the internet, the more likely is their
child to use it often, thus gaining the digital skills and beneﬁts
associated with going online.

The rise of private/mobile internet use

% Mobile phone or a handheld device

80

EL

70

Average for all
children
UK

60

CY

DE
AT

IE

50

LT

40
EE
BE

30

NO

SI

NL

FR

BG

SE

Parents are (almost) keeping

PL
FI CZ

DK

pace with their children. The

PT

more they go online, the more

HU

20

RO
TR

effectively parents can mediate

10
30

40

50

60

% Own bedroom at home


70

80

their children’s internet use

30 per cent of 11-16 year olds – especially those with some psychological
problems – report one or more experiences linked to excessive internet use
“fairly” or “very often” (eg, neglecting friends, schoolwork or sleep to go online)
The relation between children’s and parent’s daily internet use

100

Countries in which more children
than parents go online daily

90

BG

% Child uses daily

80

RO

CY

EE

PL
LT

EL

60

PT

50

IT

HU

ES
AT

SE
NO

UK
SI

70

DK

CZ

NL

FI

BE
DE

FR

IE

40

TR

30

Countries in which more parents
than children go online daily

20
10
10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

% Parent (of internet using child) uses daily

Policy implications
• As frequent internet use has become commonplace for
many children in Europe, the policy priorities are changed.
For children who still lack access, efforts are vital to ensure
digital exclusion does not compound social exclusion. For
children with access, efforts are required to ensure their
quality and breadth of use is sufﬁcient and fair.

• As internet use becomes increasingly privatised – used
in a bedroom, other private rooms or via a mobile device,
it is unrealistic to expect parents to watch over their child’s
shoulder to keep them safe. Instead, conversation and/
or shared activities between child and parent must take
priority. This will be aided if the remaining parents who
do not use the internet are encouraged to go online.

•

The growth in excessive internet use among some
children poses a new challenge to stakeholders. While
parents can seek to restrict the time children spend online, it
may be more effective to support the diversity of alternative
leisure activities available to children at home and outside.

INDIVIDUALISED, PRIVATISED, MOBILE

WHAT CHILDREN DO ONLINE

The EU Kids Online survey asked children which online activities
they engage in, to understand the opportunities they enjoy and
to contextualise online risks
A quarter of children overall reach this last, most advanced and creative step. It includes visiting chatrooms,
file-sharing, blogging and spending time in a virtual world. Less than one fifth of 9-12 year olds and only a
third of even 15-16 year olds do several of these activities. Across all ages, around a third of children reach
this step in Sweden, Cyprus, Hungary and Slovenia.

23% OF CHILDREN

56% OF CHILDREN

Step 4 includes playing with others online,
downloading films and music and sharing
content peer-to-peer (eg, via webcam or
message boards). Across Europe, over
half of 9-16 year old internet users reach
this point, although only one third of 9-10
year olds and less than half of 11-12 year
olds do so. Children in Sweden, Lithuania,
Cyprus, Belgium and Norway are most
likely to reach this step.

75% OF CHILDREN
Most children use the internet interactively for communication (social networking, instant
messaging, email) and reading/watching the news. This captures the activities of two thirds
of 9-10 year olds but just a quarter of 15-16 year olds. Only half of children in Austria,
Germany, Greece, Ireland, Italy, Poland and Turkey reach this step.

86% OF CHILDREN
In addition to schoolwork and games, this step adds
watching video clips online (eg, YouTube). These are
all ways of using the internet as a mass medium – for
information and entertainment. Half of 9-10 year olds
only get this far, along with a third of 11-12 year olds.

When children begin to use the internet, the first things they do are
schoolwork and playing games alone or against the computer. Fourteen
per cent don’t get further than this, including nearly a third of 9-10 year
olds and a sixth of 11-12 year olds. Also in Turkey, these popular internet
uses capture the activities of a quarter of children.

100% OF CHILDREN

While this ladder of opportunities is schematic – since children vary in which activities they take up earliest and they
vary in the combination of activities they practise – it captures the general trend across all children. How can children
be enabled to climb further up the ladder of opportunities? One way is to provide more own-language, age-appropriate
positive content – whether creative, educational, expressive, participatory or just fun!

Enabling a “ladder of opportunities”

• Younger children are much less satisfied than older children.
Only 34 per cent of 9-10 year olds say there are lots of good
things for children of their age to do online, while 55 per cent
of teenagers say this – probably because they more easily
share in wider public provision.

•

In some countries there is more for children to do online
that they enjoy – often because of differential investment
and/or because national markets vary in size, wealth and
investment in or prioritisation of the internet.

Balance between “good” and “bad” things online
70
% Good for children my age (very true)

Identifying what’s good about the internet
can be tricky, so we asked children what they
think. 44 per cent of 9-16 year olds said it is
“very true” that “there are lots of things on the
internet that are good for children of my age”.

Average for all
children

60

BG
UK
AT

50

SI

LT
CZ
PL

CY

PT

DE
FI

BE

40

EL

HU

RO
EE

DK

NL
ES

IE

IT
FR

TR

SE

30
NO
20
30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

% Children my age are bothered (Yes)

• Opportunities and risks go hand in hand, as shown by the
statistically significant country correlation between children’s
perceptions of opportunities and risks.

•

However, country variation means that four groups can
be discerned:
1. In some countries, children report lots of good things and
relatively few problems (eg, Bulgaria, the UK and Austria).
2. In other countries, children report lots of good things to
do online but also quite a few problems (eg, Greece and
the Czech Republic).
3. Then there are countries where children think there are
a fair few problems and not so many benefits (eg, Norway,
Sweden, Ireland and Estonia).
4. Last are the countries where children perceive relatively fewer
benefits or risks of internet use (eg, Turkey, Belgium, France).

Policy implications
• In countries where children do not “progress” very far
up the ladder of opportunities, educational and digital
literacy initiatives should be prioritised.

• Provision for younger children online should be a priority,
especially in small language communities. The “European
Award for Best Children’s Online Content” is a valuable
step in this direction, but such provision could also be
supported by high profile national initiatives.

• Since opportunities and risks online go hand in hand,
efforts to increase opportunities may also increase
risks, while efforts to reduce risks may restrict children’s
opportunities. A careful balancing act, which recognises
children’s online experiences “in the round”, is vital.

Online risks are also hard to investigate. We asked, “do you think there are things
on the internet that people about your age will be bothered by in any way?”. This
time 55 per cent said “yes”

ENCOURAGING OPPORTUNITIES FOR YOUTH

RISKY OPPORTUNITIES

Most activities children do online can be beneficial or harmful,
depending on the circumstances. Some are ambiguous –
“risky opportunities” allow children to experiment online with
relationships, intimacy and identity. This is vital for growing up
if children are to learn to cope with the adult world. But risky
opportunities are linked to vulnerability as well as resilience.
Among 9-16 year old internet users in Europe, in the past year:

40%

have “looked for new friends on
the internet”

34%

have “added people to my friends
list or address book that I have
never met face-to-face”

16%

15%

have “sent personal information
to someone that I have never met
face-to-face”

14%

have “sent a photo or video of myself
to someone that I have never met
face-to-face”

have “pretended to be a different
kind of person on the internet from
what I really am”

Which children do these risky online activities?
•

Older children, boys, and children higher in self-efficacy
and sensation seeking.

• Those who use the internet in more places, for longer, and
for more activities, as predicted by the usage hypothesis.

• Children who encounter more offline risks (eg, say “yes” to: “Had
so much alcohol that I got really drunk”, “Missed school lessons
without my parents knowing”, “Had sexual intercourse”, “Been
in trouble with my teachers for bad behaviour”, “Been in trouble
with the police”), as predicted by the risk migration hypothesis.

• Children with more psychological difficulties, as predicted
by the vulnerability hypothesis.
•

Children who say it is “very true” that “I find it easier
to be myself on the internet”, as predicted by the social
compensation hypothesis.


• Children with more digital literacy and safety skills, suggesting
that online experimentation can enhance skills, though greater
skill is also linked to more (not fewer) online risky activities.
The survey examined digital
literacy and safety skills
among the 11-16 year olds
in more detail, finding
that children have on
average about half the
skills asked about.

11-13 year old

14-16 year old

Boys

Girls

Boys

Girls

All

Bookmark a website

56

52

73

72

64

Block messages from someone you don’t want to hear from

51

53

75

74

64

Change privacy settings on a social networking profile

41

44

69

69

56

Delete the record of which sites you have visited

42

37

67

61

52

Block unwanted adverts or junk mail/spam

41

39

65

57

51

Change filter preferences

19

16

46

31

28

Find information on how to use the internet safely

54

51

74

70

63

Compare different websites to decide if information is true

47

44

67

63

56

Average number of skills

3.4

3.2

5.2

4.8

4.2

% who say they can…
Instrumental/safety skills

Informational skills

Relation between frequency and skills in internet use

•

FI

Those who use the internet more have more skills
– this holds for individuals and also at the country level, as
shown in the graph.

NL
EE

•

Average number of online skills

6
Average for all
children
PT

5

AT

SI
CZ

DE

IE

4

SE
NO
BG
LT
DK
PL

UK
BE

FR
ES

These various skills go hand in hand – the eight skills
are intercorrelated, meaning that, for example, those who can
judge the veracity of websites are also those who can find safety
information, those who can bookmark a site can also block
unwanted messages, and so on. It also means that those who
struggle with one skill are likely to struggle with others.

CY

EL
RO

HU

• Younger children lack significant skills, boys claim to
be slightly more skilled than girls, and children from higher
socioeconomic status (SES) homes say they can do more
than those from lower ones.

IT

3
TR
2
30

40

50

60

70

80

90

% Use the internet every day

•

Most 11-16 year olds can bookmark a website
(64 per cent), block messages from someone they do not wish
to be in contact with (64 per cent) or find safety information
online (63 per cent).

Policy implications
• Encouraging children to do more online will improve their

• Half can change privacy settings on a social networking

digital skill set.

profile (56 per cent), compare websites to judge the quality
of information (56 per cent), delete their history (52 per cent) or
block junk mail and spam (51 per cent).

•

Teaching safety skills is likely to improve other skills,
while teaching instrumental and informational skills will also
improve safety skills.

• Inequalities in digital skills persist – in terms of SES, age
and, to a lesser degree, gender. So efforts to overcome
these are needed.

•

Low skills among younger children are a priority for
teachers and parents, as ever younger children go online.

DIGITAL SKILLS TO BUILD RESILIENCE ONLINE

SOCIAL NETWORKING

Social networking sites (SNSs) enable children to communicate
and have fun with their friends, but not everyone has the digital
skills to manage privacy and personal disclosure.
Many sites set lower age restrictions
around 13 years but clearly these are
not working

Parental mediation is fairly effective,
despite the belief that children ignore
parental rules

•

• Among children whose parents impose no restrictions or

38 per cent 9-12 year olds and 77 per cent 13-16 year
olds have a profile on a social networking site.

•

20 per cent 9-12 year olds and 46 per cent 13-16 year
olds use Facebook as their main SNS.

• In countries where the dominant SNS has no age restrictions,
younger children seem more likely to use SNSs.

• 27 per cent of 9-12 year olds display an incorrect age on
their SNS profile.

who let them use SNSs with permission, most children have
an SNS profile, even among the youngest.

• Among the one in three children whose parents ban their
use of SNSs, younger children appear to respect parental
regulation. Although from 13 years old they take less notice
of their parents, still, a majority comply.
Relation between child’s SNS use and parental rules by age
No restrictions on SNS

Balance between younger and older children using SNSs
100

Facebook

70

Non-Facebook

65

LT

Average for all
children

60

PL

55

HU

50
SE

45

CY
EE
FI

AT

40
35

TR

30

BG
EL

IE

SI
CZ

NO

80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10

IT
DE

RO

25

PT

DK

UK
BE

SNS not allowed

90

NL

% Children with a profile on SNS xx

% Children aged 9-12 with a profile on SNS

75

SNS only with permission

ES

0

FR

9

20

10

11

12

13

Age of child

60

65

70

75

80

85

90

95

100

% Children aged 13-16 with a profile on SNS
Note: “Facebook countries” – those where Facebook is the main SNS.
Base: All children who use the internet.


Base: children who use the internet.

14

15

16

Does it matter if young children
use SNSs?

• Compared with those who do not use SNSs, SNS users
are significantly more likely to report seeing sexual images,
receiving sexual or bullying messages or meeting online
contacts offline – though for each risk, the overall incidence
is fairly low.

Children surely have the right to use services where many social
activities – for governmental, artistic, citizen groups, news,
educational offerings and more – take place. But to enable
these opportunities, some risks should be further mitigated.

Aren’t children internet-savvy enough
to manage their SNS settings?

• 29 per cent of 9-12 year olds and 27 per cent of 13-16 year
olds have their profile “public”, though this varies according
to the country and the SNS used.

• Features designed to protect children from other users if
needed are not easily understood by everyone, especially
by younger children.

• A quarter of SNS users communicate online with people
unconnected to their daily lives, including one fifth of 9-12
year olds.

• A large minority don’t know how to manage their privacy
settings, and four in ten younger children don’t know how
to block someone sending them unwelcome messages.

•

One fifth of children whose profile is public display their
address and/or phone number, twice as many as for those
with private profiles.

• Most children, however, are confident SNS users who are

• One in six 9-12 year olds and one in three 13-16 year olds

gaining the skills to use these services safely and greatly
enjoy doing so.

have more than 100 contacts on their SNS profile.

Which of these things do you know how to do on the internet?
Change privacy settings
SNS

Block another user

%
11-12

%
13-14

%
15-16

%
11-12

%
13-14

%
15-16

Facebook

55

70

78

61

76

80

Nasza-Klasa

64

80

85

56

71

83

schülerVZ

61

73

81

62

72

78

Tuenti

53

72

82

67

84

91

Hyves

68

77

89

79

88

94

Hi5

42

63

56

51

65

73

All SNSs

56

71

78

61

75

81

Base: All children aged 11-16 with a profile on the named SNS.

Policy implications
•

If SNS age restrictions cannot be made effective,
the de facto use of SNS by young children should be
addressed so as to ensure age-appropriate protection.

• Privacy/safety settings and reporting mechanisms should
be far more user-friendly. If they remain difficult to use,
privacy/safety settings should be enabled by default.

• Digital skills to protect privacy and personal data should
be strongly supported among children of all ages.

• It should also be recognised that one in three parents (51
per cent of parents of 9-12 year olds, 15 per cent of parents
of 13-16 year olds) do not want their child to use SNSs.

COMMUNICATION, PRIVACY, SELF-DISCLOSURE

WHAT UPSETS CHILDREN ONLINE

We asked children to tell us in their own words, “what things
on the internet would bother people about your age?”.
A note on method
It is not easy to ask children about sensitive issues associated
with online risks. Our approach was to interview children
at home, face-to-face, so the child would be relaxed and
the interviewer could check the child’s understanding of
questions asked. For the sensitive questions, children
completed the survey in privacy – either answering on
a computer screen turned to face them, or by pen and
paper before putting their answers in a sealed envelope.
We defined terms carefully and neutrally, avoiding emotive
or value-laden terms (eg, “bully”, “stranger”). The focus
was on children’s reports of what had actually happened
to them within a set time period rather than on general
opinions. Cognitive testing ensured children understood
the questionnaire, and we took great care in translating this
into 26 languages. For example, to ask children about the
possible harms associated with specific risks (and instead
of assuming that harm was inevitable), we asked children if
a particular experience had “bothered” them, defining this as
something that “made you feel uncomfortable, upset, or feel
that you shouldn’t have seen it.” We asked this first, before
mentioning any kinds of risk at all, to see children’s own views.
A leaflet of helpful advice and sources of further support and
guidance was provided for every child who participated in
the survey, and we thank Insafe for compiling this – in
25 country versions!

However, most children do not report being bothered or
upset by going online.

• 8 per cent of parents think their child has been bothered by
something online – parents of girls, and parents from higher
SES homes, are a little more likely to think this.

•

This means both that parents are a little more likely to
underestimate harmful children’s experiences overall, and
also that in over half of the cases (59 per cent) where children
have been bothered, their parents are unaware that something
has happened.

What upsets children online
10
13

Girls

57
7
11

Boys

53
6
9

9-10 yrs

40
11-12 yrs

9
11

13-14 yrs

9
12

57

62
9
15

15-16 yrs

59

•

55 per cent of all children consider that there are things
on the internet that will bother children about their own age.

7
11

Low SES

55

•

12 per cent of European 9-16 year olds say that they
have been bothered or upset by something on the internet.

8
12

Medium SES

53
11
13

High SES

60
8

% My child has been bothered by something online (parent)

12

All children
% I have been bothered by something online (child)
% There are things online that bother children my age (child)


55
0

20

40

60

80

100

“When I am playing games
with my older sister on the
internet, naked people
pop up and it is very bad”
(girl, 15, Turkey)

“Lies that are being spread.
Cyberpesting, it happens more
and more” (girl, 14, Belgium)

“If someone says that someone
will do something on the internet
like ruin your character that you
have in a game” (boy, 10, Sweden)

“When human beings are killed;
when human beings are hurt
while other people are watching”
(girl, 10, Germany)

“Hacker; spying; cheating; strangers
who contact you online and you do
not really know what they want from
you” (boy, 11, Austria)

“If people put your secrets on the
internet. If people take pictures
or videos of you and put them on
the internet when you don’t want
them to” (girl, 9, Ireland)
“To tell something nasty about
a girl friend and then tell it to
everyone” (girl, 12, France)
“All kinds of bullies, who can
hurt person with words”
(girl, 14, Estonia)
“Obscene scenes with naked people,
men with men or men with women,
saying rude words, hitting, whipping”
(boy, 12, France)

Po
Policy implications
• Children are concerned about a wide range of online
C
risk
risks. Efforts to manage these risks, and to support
children in coping with them, should maintain a broad
and updated view of these risks.

• As 9 per cent of 9-10 year olds have been bothered
“Kids bullying each other and
being cruel and nasty. Sending
nasty rumours about them to
other people” (girl, 16, UK)

or upset by something on the internet in the past year.
it is important to promote awareness-raising and other
safety practices for ever younger children.

• Awareness-raising among teenagers (and their parents
and teachers) remains a priority since upsetting experiences
rise with age and the array of risks keeps changing.

UNWELCOME OR UPSETTING EXPERIENCES

SEXUAL CONTENT

Society has long worried about children’s exposure to sexual
content of one kind or another. The survey shows that exposure
still occurs offline as well as online, with online pornography
spreading for some children and in some countries.
Key findings

• Sexual content is not just found on websites but is now also

• Children encounter pornography online and offline – 14 per

circulated via electronic devices among peers – 15 per cent
of 11-16 year olds in Europe have received sexual messages,
and 4 per cent (about 25 per cent of those who had received
a message) said they had been upset by this. Also, 3 per cent
say they have sent sexual messages to someone.

cent of 9-16 year olds have seen sexual images online, and
4 per cent (about 25 per cent of those who had seen sexual
images online) were upset by this; 23 per cent have seen sexual
images altogether (including on websites but also television or
videos/DVDs – 12 per cent, in magazines or books – 7 per cent).

• A minority of online content is sexually explicit – among 11-16
year olds, 11 per cent have seen nudity, 8 per cent have seen
someone having sex, 8 per cent of seen genitals, and 2 per
cent have seen violent sex. Also, 2 per cent have been asked
to talk about sexual acts with someone online and 2 per cent
have been asked for an image of their genitals.


•

Age and gender make a difference – more older than
younger children report exposure to sexual content, and more
boys than girls have seen sexual images; a third of teenage
boys say they have seen these, a quarter online.

•

Risks migrate – those who have encountered a range of
risks offline are more likely to encounter sexual content online.

Children’s exposure to sexual content

Sexual content
34
20

NO

online appears to be highest in Nordic
countries and some Eastern European

29
19
29
18
28
16
28
21
26
18
25
19
25
17
22
15
20
14
20
19
19
22
17
18
17
17
15
17
14
11
13
15
13
14
12
11
11
12
11
11
11
8
11
9

EE
FI
DK

countries; children report lesser exposure
in Southern Europe and predominantly
Catholic countries

CZ
SE
LT
SI
NL
BG
FR

• Vulnerability matters – those who report more psychological

RO

difficulties are also more likely to have seen sexual images or
received sexual messages online, and they are more often
upset by the experience.

BE

•

Risk and harm are not the same – older children and
boys encounter more sexual content, but younger children
and girls are more upset when they do encounter this. Also,
“sensation seekers” encounter more content and yet are less
upset about it – possibly the very act of seeking and finding
new content builds resilience for some.

• Parents are insufficiently aware – among children who have
seen sexual images online, 40 per cent of their parents are
unaware of this, rising to half of parents of girls and younger
children; the groups more upset by what they see. Among
those who have received sexual messages, 52 per cent of their
parents are unaware of this and again this is more common
among parents of girls and younger children.

AT
PL
EL
PT
TR
CY
UK
IE
HU
ES

% Seen sexual images
on any website
% Seen or received
sexual messages

7
4

IT

4
16
14
15

DE
ALL
0

20

40

60

80

100

Policy implications
• Although public concern over online sexual content is justified,
the extent of children’s exposure should not be exaggerated,
and nor should it be assumed that all children are upset or
harmed by such exposure – the present findings do not support
some of the moral panics surrounding this issue.

• Although the internet makes sexual content more readily
available to all, with many children reporting exposure via
accidental pop-ups, the regulation of more established
media (television, video, magazines, etc) remains important.

• Private access also matters – children who go online via
their own laptop, mobile phone or, especially, a handheld

device are more likely to have seen sexual images and/or
received sexual messages. Similarly, those who go online
in their bedroom, at a friend’s house or “out and about” are
more likely to see sexual content online. The early advice
that parents should put the computer in a public room must
be revised, and new safety tools are needed.

• It seems that popular discourses centred on teenage boys’
deliberate exposure to sexual content makes it harder for
parents and others to recognise the distress that inadvertent
exposure may cause girls, younger children and those facing
psychological difficulties in their lives.

MOST NOT BOTHERED BY SEXUAL CONTENT ONLINE BUT...

ONLINE BULLYING

We asked children if they had been treated, or had treated other
people, in a hurtful or nasty way on the internet, whether as a
single, repeated or persistent occurrence.
• Across Europe, 6 per cent of 9 to 16-year-old internet users
report having been bullied online, and 3 per cent confess to
having bullied others.

•

Far more have been bullied offline, however, with 19 per
cent saying they have been bullied at all – and 12 per cent
have bullied someone else. In some countries, bullying is
much more common than in others.

Online bullying has rightly attracted a lot of policy
attention. But it is not a wholly new problem. And nor
are the children who do it simply “bad”. What does the
EU Kids Online survey tell us?

•

How does online bullying relate to offline bullying? Half
(56 per cent) of online bullies said they had also bullied
people face-to-face, and half (55 per cent) of online victims
said they have also been bullied face-to-face. So it is not that
bullying takes place either online or offline but that instead
bullying migrates from one to the other, making it hard for
the victim to escape.

• What is the link between children who bully and children
who are bullied? It seems that bullying and being bullied
tend to go together. Among those who do not bully others,
being bullied is relatively rare – 8 per cent offline only, and
4 per cent online. But, among those who have bullied others
offline, nearly half (47 per cent) have also been bullied offline
(and fewer online). On the other hand, among those who
have bullied others online, nearly half (40 per cent) have been
bullied online (and fewer offline).
Whether a child is victim of bullying , by whether the child
bullies others
Bully victim (offline only)

Bully victim (online)

70%
60%
10%

50%
40%

40%

30%
47%
20%
10%

4%

18%

8%
0%
Not a bully


Bully (offline only)

Bully (online)

Although relatively few children report being bullied, this is the risk that upsets
them most, more than sexual images, sexual messages, or meeting online
contacts offline
Whether child has been bullied online or at all
% Been bullied on the internet
% Been bullied at all, online or offline
14
43
13
41

EE
RO

• Which children bully or are bullied? Children who bully and

12
25
11
28

DK
SE

who are bullied online report rather more psychological difficulties
than children with no experience of bullying online. Also, those
who bully tend to be higher in sensation seeking, while those
who are bullied are more often ostracised by their peers.

8
31

NO
8
21

UK

8
26
7
28
7
26

CZ
AT
FR

• Are children who are bullied harmed by this? The 6 per cent
of children who have been bullied online divide fairly evenly
into those who were very upset (31 per cent), fairly upset
(24 per cent), a bit upset (30 per cent) and, the smallest
category, not at all upset (15 per cent). Girls are more upset
than boys (37 per cent vs. 23 per cent “very upset”).

6
20
6
19
6
21
6
19
5
18
5
19
5
16
5
15
4
16
4
20
4
23
4
14
4
17

HU
BE
BG
PL
FI
LT
DE
CY
ES
SI
IE
NL
EL

• How do children who are bullied online cope with this?
Children cope fairly well with being bullied online – a third
(36 per cent) try to fix the problem, most tell someone (77
per cent, usually a friend but often a parent), and nearly half
(46 per cent) block the person sending the hurtful messages.

Policy implications
• In countries where there is more bullying, there tends to
be more bullying online. This suggests that as internet use
increases, so will bullying online. Thus anti-bullying initiatives
should accompany efforts to promote internet use.

3
11
2
9
2
11

TR
PT
IT

• Online and offline bullying should be seen as connected,
6
19

ALL
0

20

40

60

80

100

part of a vicious cycle in which perpetrators reach their
victims through diverse means and victims find it hard
to escape.

• Yet, those who bully may also be vulnerable, and they are
often victims themselves, so sensitive treatment is required.

• Although children have a range of coping responses,
this risk does upset them, and more support is needed
– fewer than half tell a parent or other adult, and fewer
than half know how to block the person or delete their
messages, so further awareness-raising is vital.

BULLIES MAY ALSO BE BULLIED

MEETING NEW CONTACTS ONLINE

50 per cent of children 11-16 say “I find it easier to be myself on
the internet than when I am with people face-to-face”.
Communicating, making new friends, developing intimacy – all
this is fraught with difficulties and embarrassment for young
people. The internet, it seems, offers a space for privacy,
control over communication and experimentation. It also lets
children easily get to know many new people, whether they
are like them or quite different.
Traditionally, it has been clear who children are in touch with
because, first, the child can see who they are talking to, also the
parent can oversee who the child is talking to and, last, because
the child’s own identity is not in doubt. But on the internet, none
of this can be assumed. Online, no-one knows, famously, if you
yourself are a dog – or a child. It is not clear if you are talking to
a child or an adult, including an adult pretending to be a child.
Nor can parents oversee their children’s friends – they are no
longer present in the house or street, only on the computer, often
inaccessible even to curious or concerned parents.
Nowhere has the public anxiety been greater than over the tension
between “meeting strangers” (as many adults see it) and “making
new friends” (as children may see it). Meeting strangers is a risk.
Making new friends is an opportunity. Distinguishing between the
two may depend on the child and the circumstances. Avoiding
the emotive terms “stranger” and “friend”, we asked children in
the survey about the people they are in touch with online and
whether they also know them offline.

• 87 per cent of 11-16 year olds say that online they are in touch
with people they first met face-to-face. But 39 per cent are in
touch with people they met on the internet who are friends or
family of people they know. And 25 per cent are in touch with
people they met online who have no connection with their
existing social circle.


• 30 per cent of European 9-16 year olds have had contact
online with someone they haven’t met face to face, but only 9
per cent have gone to an offline meeting with such a person.
On a country level, there is no obvious relation between making
contacts online and meeting them offline.

• Among those who have met online contacts offline, half have
met one or two people in the past year, half have met more.
Also, 57 per cent met a friend of a friend (someone in their
social circle) while 48 per cent met someone unconnected
with their life before meeting them online.

• Among those children who did meet an online contact offline,
61 per cent of their parents were not aware of this, rising to 68 per
cent among the younger children. Parents were least aware
of such meetings in Ireland, the
UK, Cyprus and Portugal.

Meeting new people online is commonplace for European children. Only in a
small minority of cases is there cause for serious concern

Whether child has met new people online and then met
them offline
% Ever gone on to meet anyone face to face that you first met
on the internet
% Ever had contact with someone you have not met face to
face before
25
54
23
52
18
54

EE
LT
SE
CZ
NO
SI
BE
FR

• 11 per cent of those who went to such meetings (ie, 1 per
cent of all children surveyed) were bothered or upset by what
happened. Since the vast majority were not upset by such
meetings, what makes the difference? We didn’t ask much
about what happened, though we know that two thirds of
those upset met someone about their own age, and that a
fifth said something hurtful was said and a few said something
sexual happened.

12
49

FI
12
42
11
38

DK
DE

• But we do know that those who were upset were more likely

9
31

BG

to be younger, low in self-efficacy and higher in psychological
difficulties – in short, they tend to be the more vulnerable children.

9
21

ES

Those who make contacts online tend to be higher in
self-efficacy and/or sensation seekers who use the internet
more, who engage in risky online and offline activities and
whose parents place fewer restrictions on their internet use.
Interestingly, those who go to meet new contacts offline
show a similar pattern except they are also more likely to
have psychological difficulties; so children’s vulnerability is
part of what makes some go to face-to-face meetings with
‘new friends’.

13
32
13
34
12
30
12
32

RO

•

•

16
45
15
46
15
49

AT

What else do we know about who makes
new contacts online?

8
26
8
25

HU
PL

6
32

NL
6
14

CY

Policy implications

6
20

EL

•

5
28

UK

It is important to distinguish making new contacts
online – a common occurrence – from going to meet new
online contacts offline. It is equally important to recognise
that for the most part, meeting online contacts offline is
harmless, probably even fun.

5
16

PT

4
28
4
27

IE
IT
3
18

TR

• But for a minority of children, meeting online contacts

9
30

ALL
0

20

40

60

80

100

offline are harmful, and these children tend already to be
the more vulnerable.

•

Since their parents are often unaware of what has
happened, awareness raising efforts should be increased
so that parents of younger and/or more vulnerable children
recognise the risk, but without this undermining the chance
for most children to have fun making new friends.

MEETING “STRANGERS” OR MAKING NEW “FRIENDS”

NEWER RISKS

Public anxiety often focuses on pornography, “sexting”, bullying
and meeting strangers, especially for young children. But there
are other risks that worry children, including many teenagers.
Survey findings showed that negative
user-generated content is not uncommon:

Varieties of personal data misuse
also occur:

• Hate sites – 12 per cent of European 11-16 year olds have

• Identity theft – 7 per cent of 11-16 year olds say that in

seen these in the past year, rising to one in five 15-16 year olds.

the past year somebody used their password to access their
information or pretend to be them.

• Pro-anorexic sites – 10 per cent have seen these, rising

•

to one in five teenage girls (14-16 years old).

• Self-harm sites – 7 per cent have seen these, again more
older than younger children.

• Drug forums – 7 per cent have seen these too, rising to
12 per cent of 15-16 year olds.

Personal information abuse – 4 per cent say that
somebody used their personal information in a way they
didn’t like.

• Financial cheating – just 1 per cent say that they lost money
by being cheated on the internet.

•

• Suicide sites – 5 per cent have seen these.
• Overall – 21 per cent of 11-16 year olds have seen at least

Overall – 9 per cent say that they have experienced at
least one of these three forms of personal data misuse, and
this too varies by country.

one of these types of user-generated content; this varies by
country, as shown in the graph.

“Be made a ridicule by having
personal stuff written about you and
then made public” (boy, 11, Greece)

“Somebody that would ‘crack’ my
password, I mean to access my account,
to impersonate me and to make people
in my contact list believe that I’m lying
to them etc” (girl, 12, Romania)

“Violence (scenes), shocking
news” (girl, 14, Slovenia)

“Bloodthirsty websites that show how someone
is beating himself bloody or how someone is
scratching himself” (girl, 15, Austria)


“Pictures of naked people
and of people who want to
lose weight very quickly”
(girl, 10, Portugal)

“Being hacked by other children online (like:
they find out what for instance your password
is on an online community)” (girl, 9, Norway)

“Lack of sleep, you don’t do your
homework if you are too much on
the computer and can’t concentrate
on study” (boy, 14, Finland)

Child (11-16) has encountered negative user-generated
content or data misuse

• As well as conducting surveys, qualitative work based

% Has experienced data misuse
% Has seen potentially harmful user generated content
14
43
10
42

CZ
NO
EE
SI
BG

(user-generated content and personal data misuse) poses
a critical challenge to policy makers.

• While younger children have fewer resources to cope with
online risk, they are also more willing to turn to parents for
help; meanwhile, teenagers face particular risks that worry
them and that they may struggle with alone, so they need
particular coping strategies and support.

12
29
15
29
9
28
14
27
12
26
12
25
7
24
5
23
9
23
12
20
8
20
7
19
10
19
7
18
6
18
7
16
10
16
6
15
10
14
9
21

DK
LT
AT
RO
NL
IE
PL
FI
TR
UK
CY
EL
ES
DE
IT
HU
BE
PT
FR
ALL
0

20

on listening to children is vital to learn what new risks
they are experiencing.

• Addressing risks associated with peer-to-peer conduct

14
36
18
36
9
36
8
33

SE

Policy implications

“Torturing ourselves,
attempts to suicide, using
drugs” (boy, 15, Hungary)

“Violent video filmed at
school or when somebody is
harmed” (girl, 10, Lithuania)

“Showing sexual practices, offering
drugs and weapons, religious groups”
(boy, 15, Czech Republic)

40

“To do with being skinny,
talking about weight loss
and what you can do to lose
weight” (girl, 15, UK)
l,

60

80

100

“When somebody says that
he/she is going to commit
suicide” (boy, 15, Germany)

“Girlfriends who I thought my friends
have been awful. They took my identity
to have my boyfriend” (girl, 15, France)

“The inﬂuence of bad websites
such as things like diet to lose
weight so you could be known
as the pretty one. Like vomiting
things” (girl, 15, Ireland)

“The internet hackers are bothering, also the
intern
abusive use of personal accounts or the untrue
information tht somebody is spreading for
someone else” (boy, 12, Bulgaria)

THE RISKS THAT CONCERN CHILDREN KEEP CHANGING

COMPARING RISK AND HARM

4 in 10 children encountered one or more
forms of online risk in the past year

Fewer children report being harmed by
online risks

• 14 per cent of European 9-16 year olds have seen sexual

•

images online.

Being bullied online is the risk that upsets children the
most, even though it is among the least common.

• 6 per cent of 9-16 year olds have been sent nasty or hurtful

• Meeting new people offline – the risk that the public worries

messages/been bullied online.

about the most – very rarely upsets children, although when
it does upset them the consequences can be very serious.

• 30 per cent of 9-16 year olds have had contact online with
someone they have not met face to face.

• 9 per cent of 9-16 year olds have been to an offline meeting
with a contact first met online.

•

15 per cent of 11-16 year olds have seen or received
sexual messages online.

• 21 per cent of 11-16 year olds have come across one or
more types of potentially harmful user-generated content.

• While society may judge, on moral grounds, that children
should not be exposed to sexual content, children are only
upset by such exposure in a few circumstances, while in
others such exposure may be pleasurable.
• Among the minority upset by sexual content, children are most
upset by being asked to talk about sexual acts with someone
or being asked for an image of their genitals (by comparison,
for example, with sexual messages or images of intercourse).

• 9 per cent have experienced one or more types of personal
data misuse.

• As use of the internet increases – at the level of individuals
and countries – so too does risk.

How upset the child felt after encountering the
risk online
% Very

Encountering online risks by frequency of internet use

Sexual
images
Sexual
messages
Meeting new
people

% Experienced one or more risk factor

70
Average for all
children

LT

60

EE
SE

NO

Bullying

CZ

% Fairly

4

9
8

15

72

14

76

12
93

322
0

% Not at all
30

24

31
5

% A bit

20

40

60

80

DK
SI

FI
NL

RO

50

BG

AT
DE

FR

40
HU
ES
EL
PT

IE
TR

Risk refers to the probabillity not the
inevitability of harm

BE
PL

UK
IT

CY

30
30

40

50

60

70

% Use the internet every day

80

90

Generally, children who are older, higher in self-efficacy
and sensation seeking, who do more online activities
(ie, are higher on the ladder of opportunities) and who
have more psychological problems encounter more
risks of all kinds online.
In contrast, children who are younger, lower in self-efficacy
and sensation seeking, who do fewer online activities, have
fewer skills, and who have more psychological problems
find online risks more harmful and upsetting.


100

In some countries, a similar level of risk
is less upsetting than in others
•

Broadly, in countries where more children encounter
online risk, children also report more bothering or upsetting
experiences – and vice versa.

• But some country comparisons are thought-provoking. For
example, children in Finland and Denmark report similar levels
of risk, but Danish children are more often upset. At a lower
level of risk, the same holds for Spanish and Italian children.

• Since risk increases as use increases, it might seem
simple to call for restrictions on children’s use of the
internet. But online opportunities and digital literacy also
increase with use, so there is no simple solution. Rather,
ways must be found to manage risk without unduly
restricting opportunities.

Encountering online risks by whether bothered or
upset by internet use
70

% Experienced one or more risk factor

Policy implications

•
Average for all
children

LT

EE
NO

CZ

60

SE

FI
SI

AT

50

BE

FR
DE
IT
PT

30
0

RO

NL

BG

40

DK

PL
IE

UK

CY HU
EL

•

ES
TR

10

As with riding a bike or crossing the road, everyday
activities online carry a risk of harm, but this harm is far
from inevitable – indeed, it is fairly rare. The EU Kids Online
survey provides clear empirical support for policy efforts
both to manage children’s encounters online so as to reduce
harm (though not necessarily to reduce risk). This should
be achieved both by designing the online environment to
build in safety considerations and to increase children’s
digital skills, coping and resilience.

20

30

In some countries, the need for such efforts is already
pressing. In others, it may be anticipated that as use rises, so
to will the need for greater policy efforts regarding children’s
safety, empowerment and well-being.

% Bothered by something on the internet

RISK IS NOT EQUAL TO HARM

HOW CHILDREN COPE WITH HARM

Society has a responsibility to provide guidance and support for
children facing online risks. But it is also important to support
children’s capacity to cope themselves, thereby building resilience
for digital citizens.
• It might be thought that increasing children’s digital skills

• Some online experiences are so extreme or upsetting that

would reduce their encounters with online risk. But as EU
Kids Online findings show, increased skills are associated
with a wider and deeper use of the internet, bringing both
more opportunities and more risks.

children should not be exposed to them in the first place –
for these, self- or state-regulation of the online environment
is required. But for many everyday encounters, ‘end-user’
solutions are preferable. These may be provided by parents,
teachers or even peers – see the next section. However,
children themselves are part of the solution, and empowering
them to cope with harm is vital.

• This may not be problematic: developmental psychologists
argue that children must encounter some degree of risk –
though not risk which exceeds their capacity to cope – for
them to become resilient. The kind of risk that a child can
cope with varies with individual circumstances – some children
experience risks as harmful while others do not.

• As the graph shows, children with more skills are more likely
to have seen sexual images or received sexual messages.
But those who are upset (ie, self-reported harm) have fewer
skills than those not harmed.

More skilled children encounter more risk but
experience less harm
Average number of skills by risk and harm
8
NO

YES

What can children do, when faced
with an online risk that upsets them?

7
6

In the EU Kids Online survey, we asked children if they
did any of the following:

5
4
3

• Fatalistic responses – hope the problem will go away,
stop using the internet for a while.

2

•

Communicative responses – talk to someone about
what happened.

1
0
seen sexual
images

received sexual
messages

seen sexual
images

RISK


received sexual
messages

HARM (of those at risk)

• Pro-active strategies – try to fix the problem, delete
a problematic message, block an unwelcome person.
Communicative coping relies on having people around you
that you trust, while pro-active strategies require available,
user-friendly technical tools and the digital skills to employ
them and a fatalistic response suggests the approach of
someone lacking social, technical or skilful forms of support.

What children do when upset by online risks
sexual messages

bullying

Efforts to promote children’s digital

sexual images

Hope the problem would
go away by itself
I stopped using the
internet for a while

citizenship – in terms of online safety

22
24
26
18
20
25

and good practice – are bearing some
fruit, and should be extended
60
77

Talked to anybody at all
53
27
36

Try to fix the problem
22

I deleted any messages
from the person who
sent it to me

38
41
26
40
46

I blocked the person
who had sent it to me

23

Policy implications

24

I changed my
filter/contact settings

18
19

• Policy makers have long advised children to tell someone
if they’ve been upset online, and it seems such messages
have been heard.

18
9

I reported the problem

15

0

20

40

60

80

100

• Children try some proactive strategies more than others
and few are fatalistic: this suggests a desire to cope as
best they can and a readiness to adopt new technical
tools if these are accessible.

• When asked which strategies really helped the problem,
We found that, among those upset by a
particular risk, 11-16 year olds cope in
different ways: (see graph)

children told us that reporting the problem to an ISP was
effective with sexual images but less so for sexual or
bullying messages: this suggests that better solutions
are needed for peer-to-peer risks.

• Younger children are more likely to make fatalistic responses,

• Mostly, children said the approach they chose helped

and they are also less likely than older children to tell someone
if they are upset by sexual images. Older teens are more likely
to block unwelcome people.

in up to two thirds of cases, but this leaves room for
provision of better support and/or tools.

• Boys, compared with girls, are more likely to hope upsetting
sexual messages will go away. Girls are more likely to talk
to somebody about online harms. Interestingly, girls are also
more likely to adopt proactive strategies to online harm.

try, when upset, do not help the situation, but one possibility
is that the technical tools are flawed or difficult to use,
and another is that adults – professional or personal – are
unprepared or unable to help children.

• Children lower in self-efficacy favour fatalistic responses,

•

while children higher in self-efficacy try to fix the problem.
Self-efficacy makes no difference to either communicative
or technical responses, however.

• Children lower on the ladder of opportunities (who do fewer
online activities) adopt more fatalistic responses while those
higher on the ladder are more proactive.

• Children with more psychological difficulties tend to adopt
fatalistic responses, especially stopping using the internet,
and they are less likely to talk to someone if they are upset
when bullied though some do block the bully.

• There may be many reasons why the solutions children

The “knowledge gap” phenomenon – in which the
information-rich learn from available advice and guidance
more rapidly than the information-poor – means that
efforts to promote digital citizenship will disproportionately
benefit the already-advantaged. Targeting less privileged
or more vulnerable children is a priority.

•

Overwhelmingly, children tell a friend, followed by a
parent, when something online upsets them. Rarely
do they tell a teacher or any other adult in a position of
responsibility. Their apparent lack of trust in those who
may have more expert solutions is a concern.

EMPOWERING RESILIENT CITIZENS ONLINE AND OFFLINE

WHAT PARENTS DO WHEN CHILDREN
GO ONLINE
Parents play a vital role in keeping children safe on the internet
and they can also empower their child to gain digital skills.
Yet parents face some dilemmas. Should they be more
restrictive or more enabling? Do they understand the internet
well enough to guide their child? Should they treat the internet
like television or other media, or is it different? What are the

technical options available to them? The EU Kids Online
survey asked about ﬁve parental strategies – and we asked
both parents and children what really happened at home.

What parents say they do when their child goes online
% 13-16 yrs

% 9-12 yrs

74
76

technical

Software to prevent spam/junk mail or viruses
11

A service or contract that limits the time your child spends on the internet

14
23

Parental controls or other means of keeping track of the websites your child visits

32
28

Parental controls or other means of blocking or filtering some types of website
monitoring

Which friends or contacts your child adds to social networking profile

39
36

Your child’s profile on a social network or online community

39
25

The messages in your child’s email or instant messaging account

48
44

40
45

Which websites your child visited

63
55

Upload photos, videos or music to share with others

85
83

restrictive

Give out personal information to others on the internet
33

Have your own social networking profile
28

Watch video clips on the internet

63
46

Download music or films on the internet

79

27

Use instant messaging

64
60
61

active (safety)

Talked to you about what to do if something on the internet bothered your child
37

Helped you in the past when something has bothered your child on the internet

39
65
63
64

Suggested ways to behave towards other people online
Suggested ways to use the internet safely
Explained why some websites are good or bad

40

Do shared activities together with your child on the internet
active (use)

70
70

56

Helped your child when something is difficult to do or find on the internet
53
52

Encourage your child to explore and learn things on the internet on their own

39

Sit with your child while they use the internet

77
75

58

48

Stay nearby when your child uses the internet

70
59
79

Talk to your child about what they do on the internet
0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

85
90

• 88 per cent parents impose rules about whether their child

• Monitoring what the child does online later is less popular,

can give out personal information online

since it may imply less trust

• 81 per cent talk to their children – especially their daughters

• While three quarters use software to prevent spam/viruses,

– about what they do on the internet

less than a third uses a ﬁlter for safety reasons

• 58 per cent stay nearby when their child is online


95

73

100

Most parents have got the message

What do children say about this?
• Children report similar levels of parental activity to parents,

that it is worthwhile engaging with
their child’s internet use – but a few
could do more

though they underestimate parental levels of monitoring
and filtering.

• They are generally positive about their parents’ actions –
over two thirds say it is helpful (27 per cent “very”, 43 per cent
“a bit”) – teens largely agree with younger children about this.

•

Contrary to the view that parents know little of what their
children do online, two thirds of children say their parents know
a lot (32 per cent) or quite a lot (36 per cent) about what they do.

• Around one in ten parents does few or none of the forms

• However, nearly half think what their parents do limits their

of mediation we asked about.

online activities (11 per cent “a lot”, 33 per cent “a little”), and
9-10 year olds feel the most restricted.

•

Parents reduce their amount of mediation – especially
restrictions – as children get older, though interestingly they
are equally likely to advise on safety whatever the child’s age.

• Parents from higher vs. lower SES homes do more active/safety
mediation though no more restrictive or technical mediation.

•

Parents who are internet users do more of all forms of
mediation than parents who are not.

•

And, as often suspected, a third of children say they
sometimes ignore what their parents say about using the
internet (7 per cent “a lot”, 29 per cent “a little”).

•

Some would like their parents to take “a lot” (5 per cent)
or “a little” (10 per cent) more interest in what they do online,
especially among the 9-12 year olds; most would not, though.

• Interestingly, only 15 per cent of parents say they have changed
their approach to internet safety because of something that upset
their child online, although one in five parents say this in Estonia,
Bulgaria and Romania where, possibly, they are undergoing a
process of rapid adjustment to widespread internet access.

• Overall, four fifths of parents (especially those with younger

Policy implications

children) are confident that they can help their child deal with
anything online that bothers them, and they are also fairly
confident in their child’s ability to cope.

• Parents employ a wide range of strategies, depending

• Still, one quarter of parents think it is “fairly” (23 per cent) or
“very” (5 per cent) likely that their child will experience problems
online in the next six months, and half think they should take
more interest in their child’s online activities.

partly on the age of the child. But there are some parents
who do not do very much, even for young children, and
there are some children would like their parents to take
more interest. Targeting these parents with awareness
raising messages and resources is thus a priority.

•

children who encounter fewer risks and also less harm
– but also fewer online opportunities (these children do
fewer online activities, and have fewer digital skills).

Cynicism that what parents do is not valued, or that
children will evade parental guidance, is ungrounded: the
evidence reveals a more positive picture in which children
welcome parental interest and mediating activities while
parents express confidence in their children’s abilities. It is
important to maintain this situation as the internet becomes
more complex and more embedded in everyday life.

•

• Parental restrictions carry a significant cost in terms of

• Parents who practise more restrictive regulation have

Parents who practise more active safety mediation or
monitoring have children who encounter more risks (especially
younger children) and more harm (especially teenagers) –
probably, parental mediation is a response to, rather than
a condition for, problematic online experiences (and these
children do more online activities and have more skills).

children’s online opportunities and skills, but they may be
appropriate if children are vulnerable to harm. Parental
efforts to empower children online seem to enhance their
opportunities and skills, though there is little evidence that
they reduce risk or harm. There are no easy answers,
therefore, so parents should be supported in judging
what best suits their child.

EMPOWERING, SHARING, RESTRICTING, FILTERING

WHO SUPPORTS CHILDREN –
PARENTS, TEACHERS AND PEERS
Parents are not the only people responsible for children. Teachers
also have a vital role to play, and for many children, their peers
too are a valuable resource: 63 per cent of European 9-16 year
olds have received internet safety advice from parents, 58 per
cent from teachers and 44 per cent from peers.
Whether parents, peers or teachers have ever
suggested ways to use the internet safely
% Teachers

% Peers

62
49

BG
CY

53
68
70

50
50
54
47

CZ

64

54
56

DE

73

40

23

DK

67

42

EL

37

ES

69
70
70

39

FI

43

26

60
50
53

38

HU

68
72

28

IE

43

IT

49

70

51
48
50

37

LT
17

NL

60
68
70
68
68
68

29

NO

• 64 per cent of 9-16 year olds say their friends have helped
them when something is difficult to do or find on the internet,
and over a third have explained why some website are good or
bad and have suggested ways to behave towards others online.

53
57
50
60
62

39

EE

FR

them when something is difficult to do or find on the internet,
and the same percentage have explained why some websites
are good or bad. Half have talked to them generally about what
they do online or have suggested ways to behave towards other
people only and 40 per cent have talked to them about what
to do if something bothers them online. More, however, have
made rules about what children can and can’t do on the internet
at school (62 per cent).

59

40

25

BE

• 58 per cent of 9-16 year olds say their teachers have helped

% Parents

54

39

AT

45

PL

45

PT
41

RO

61
53
55

46

SE

31

SI

31

60
48
57
60
61

54

TR

85

33

UK

71
44

ALL
0

20

40

58
63

60


Beyond advising on using the internet safely, teachers and
peers help children with tricky online activities and judgements:

80

100

When something bothered them online, 36 per cent said a parent helped them,
28 per cent a friend and 24 per cent a teacher. Ideally, every child would have at
least one person to turn to
• Three quarters of 15-16 year olds have received safety advice
from friends, compared with two thirds of 9-10 year olds. It is
also more common among children from lower SES homes.

• Fewer children – especially among the 9-10 year olds – say
they have suggested to their friends how to use the internet
safely, but still over one third say they have done this.

• The more teachers and friends mediate children’s internet use,
the greater the children’s digital literacy and safety skills – this
association is stronger the younger the child. Or, since we cannot
determine the direction of causality, it may be that more skilled
children are able more effectively to gain the help of teachers
and peers (supporting the knowledge gap hypothesis).

Policy implications
•

Levels of teacher mediation are high but could be
higher, as a large minority of children are not reached by
teacher guidance. Since schools have the resources to
reach all children, they should take the biggest share of
the task of reaching the “hard to reach”.

•

The youngest children (9-10 years) report the least
mediation from teachers: as this age group now uses the
internet widely, primary schools should increase critical
and safety guidance for pupils.

•

The beneﬁts of supporting peer mediation are easily
neglected but could be constructively harnessed, especially
as children are most likely to tell a friend if something bothers
them online. Peer mentioning schemes have a valuable
role to play.

• When something has bothered them on the internet,
36 per cent of children said a parent helped them, 28
per cent a friend and 24 per cent a teacher. Ideally, every
child would have at least one person to turn to, but, as
noted already in relation to coping, a minority of children
has no-one to tell when something upsets them.

SUPPORTING CHILDREN’S ONLINE SAFETY

INEQUALITIES IN RISK AND
RESOURCES TO COPE
Some minority groupings, among all internet-using children
in Europe, face particular challenges online. Children may be
disadvantaged by lack of economic or cultural capital or they may
be disadvantaged through social or psychological vulnerability.
We used several proxy measures to identify these groups. The
differences below are generally small yet indicative.
Economic or cultural capital
27 per cent of children have parents
with lower secondary education or less
These children report fewer online risks than the European
average, but are more upset when they encounter risk.
They also claim fewer digital literacy and safety skills than
the average. This relatively inexperienced group in terms of
internet risks has parents who feel less confident in supporting
their children online, who receive less safety information from
a range of sources, and who are less likely to wish for more
such information than the average.

who do not use the internet
These children also report fewer online risks than the European
average and they are also more upset when they encounter
risk. Their digital skills are even lower than the above group,
probably because fewer have the internet at home. Their
parents are less confident also that they can support their
child online, though they think they should do more. These
parents are less likely than most to get safety information from
their friends or family, and they especially wish their child’s
school would provide more such information.

7 per cent of children use the internet
less than once per week
These children also report fewer online risks than the European
average and they are also more upset when they encounter
risk. Their digital skills are very low – they have only two of the
eight skills we asked about. Although their parents do not
consider their children well prepared to cope with the


internet, they do not plan to do more themselves than the average
parent, nor do they desire more safety information than others.

Social or psychological vulnerability
who say they are very worried about
their safety online
Interestingly, these children are no more likely than average to
have encountered online risks, nor are they more upset by them
and their digital skills are average. However, their parents are a
little less confident that their child can cope with online risks,
and they think they should do more
to support their child online.

Greater efforts are needed to focus safety resources on specific minority groups

They are also in receipt of slightly more safety information than the
average, and they wish to receive more still, from most sources.

4 per cent of children speak a minority
language at home

34 per cent of children reported more
psychological difficulties than most

Risks encountered by these children are about average though
they report being more upset from bullying and ‘sexting’. Their
digital skills are average, but their parents lack confidence in
their children’s ability to cope, and they think they should do
more to support their child online. They receive less safety
information from all sources than the average. Though they
mostly prefer to receive such information from the child’s
school, from TV or friends and family, they wish for less not
more than does the average parent.

These children report more online risks than the average,
and they are more upset when they occur. Their digital skills
are just below average and their parents lack confidence in
their ability to help their child online, though they are more
likely to have adjusted their approach after something upset
their child online. These parents neither receive nor wish for
more safety information than the average parent.

12 per cent of children have experienced
something upsetting on the internet
These children report many more risk and harm experiences
than the average, as often recognised also by their parents.
Their digital skills are above average, suggesting a readiness
to learn to manage the internet better after an upsetting
experience. Their parents, too, have changed their approach
after their child was upset online, and they are fairly confident
in both their and their child’s ability to cope in future, compared
with the average. Among those parents aware of their child’s
experience, there is a desire for more safety information from
all sources.

6 per cent of children have a mental,
physical or other disability
These children report raised risk levels, especially in relation
to contact risks. They find these more upsetting in relation to
meeting new online contacts offline, though not otherwise.
Their digital skills are also a little higher than average, though
their parents are less confident that their child can cope with
what they find online. These parents receive slightly more
safety information and, particularly, would like to receive more
from ISPs and websites than would most.

4 per cent of children belong to a
discriminated-against group
These children report more online risk, though only slightly more
harm from these risks. Their digital skills are above average,
though their parents tend to lack confidence in their ability
to support and their children’s ability in terms of coping with
online problems, and they are more likely to have adjusted their
approach in response to such problems. They are more likely to
be aware of safety information from the government, and would
like yet more, but get less support from their friends and family.

Policy implications
• For children whose parents lack economic or cultural/
educational resources, the challenge is to build digital
skills and resilience given a relative lack of experience
of the internet at home. It is important to increase the
confidence of these parents, and to raise awareness that
more safety knowledge would be beneficial. The child’s
school has a key role here as a trusted source.

•

For children with social, familial or psychological
vulnerabilities, the challenge is rather different. These
children may already be experiencing more risk of harm
from internet use, though parental worries are a poor
indicator of such experiences. Some vulnerable children
have increased digital skills already, so the policy priority
is less to raise their skills further than to consider other
ways of reducing harm. This could include helping those
parents who think they should do more to support their
child, providing “just in time” guidance for those coping
with an upsetting experience, and ensuring a wider range
of sources of safety information (eg, online sources for
parents of disabled children, government sources for
parents of discriminated-against children.

ONLINE RISK COMPOUNDS OFFLINE DISADVANTAGE

SIMILARITIES AND DIFFERENCES IN
ONLINE EXPERIENCES
Comparing children’s experiences in 25 countries is like
comparing apples and oranges – there are many variables
to consider, most of them difficult to measure.
Differences are easily overstated, so our first task was to
note how European children’s experiences of the internet are
similar wherever they live. Our second task was to recognise
differences among children depending on their country and,
if possible, to explain these differences.

In general, the more children do one kind of activity online, the
more they do of another – this applies for opportunities and
risks. So we grouped the children in the survey according to
how they use the internet, and found six “user types”, with
different relations to online risk.

Children are not all the same

rnin
Low use /lea

g oriented

n, and averages
younger childre
includes many
tle, focusing
This group
ternet rather lit
They use the in
ing/
11.4 years old.
o clips and read
k, watching vide
olwor
profile and they
mainly on scho
have an SNS
e news. Few
encounter
watching th
Although they
line activities.
set.
do few risky on
tend to be up
they do, they
e risks, when
few onlin

Diverse opp

ortunities

Low use /soc
ia
site oriented l networking

and risks
Averaging 13.4
years old, thes
e children spen
two hours a
d almost
day online an
d do the wid
activities, includ
est range of
ing some mor
e advanced an
activities on th
d creative
e ladder of op
portunities. Th
more risky on
ey also do
line activities.
Although not
group, they en
the oldest
counter the m
ost risk online
least likely to be
but are the
upset.

High use/entertainment oriented
These children are older (average 14 years) and more
often boys. They are online for most minutes per day
(201 minutes on average) and do a fairly wide range of
activities. They like playing games against the computer
and watching video clips, and they do relatively little
schoolwork, news or creative activities. Their exposure to
risk is quite high, and some use the internet excessively.


Also relatively
young (average
11.5 years), th
is less likely to
is group
use the intern
et for schoolw
and more likely
ork or news
to use SNSs. Th
ey also encoun
risks though th
ter online
ey tend not to
find these upse
tting.

Moderate use
A bit older than the first two groups at 13.1 years
on average, these children spend more time online
and have a much wider range of activities. They are,
too, more likely to encounter online risks.

Focused
so

cial

web use
This is the
oldest gro
up (averag
more girls
e 14.2 ye
than boys
ars), with
, and they
longer, do
use the in
ing more a
ternet for
ctivities, th
are unlikely
an the ave
to play gam
rage. They
es online, b
to use SN
ut are the m
Ss. They a
ost likely
lso read/w
messagin
atch news
g, post ph
, use insta
otos or m
nt
Their onlin
usic and
e risk enco
write blog
unters are
s.
and five bu
similar to g
t they repo
roups four
rt slightly h
igher levels
of upset.

Countries can be characterised as
“lower use, lower risk”, “lower use,
some risk”, “higher use, some risk”
Country classification based on children’s online use
and risk (from EU Kids Online survey)

and “higher use, higher risk”

FI
SE
NO

EE

DK

EI

LT
UK

NL

PL
BE

DE

CZ

FR

AT

HU
SI

PT

RO

Policy implications

IT
ES
BG

•
TR
EL

CY

Although in reality countries are subtly graded in terms of
amounts and types of use and risk, we here group them for
ease into four categories. Overall, it is striking that high internet
use is rarely associated with low risk; and high risk is rarely
associated with low use. Rather, the more use, the more risk
though high use is not necessarily associated with high risk.
“Lower use, lower risk” countries – here children make the
lowest use of the internet, and they are below average on all
risks apart from meeting online contacts – online and offline; still,
it may be expected that as levels of use rise in these countries,
so too will risk.
“Lower use, some risk” countries have the lowest internet
usage, although there is some excessive use of the internet and
some problems with user-generated content.
“Higher use, some risk” countries make high use of the
internet but are high only on some risks, possibly because of
effective awareness-raising campaigns, regulatory strategies
or strategies of parental mediation of children’s internet use.
“Higher use, higher risk” countries include both wealthy
Nordic countries and Eastern European countries (better called,
“New use, new risk”).
A country’s socio-economic stratification, regulatory
framework, technological infrastructure and educational
system all shape children’s online risks.

Children in wealthier countries (measured by GDP)
encounter more online risk but, arguably, these countries
are also well placed to provide more accessible and
user-friendly safety resources for children and parents.
Also, countries with more press freedom, such as Nordic
and Baltic countries, are more likely to have children who
encounter online risk – this may be because of lower
internet regulation and strategies that ensure safety
without introducing censorship are thus needed.

• At the country level, there is no systematic relation between
level of parental filtering in a country and children’s risk
experiences, although there is a small relationship at the
individual level – children whose parents use a filter are less
likely to have encountered sexual content, suggesting filters
can play a useful role.

• Degree of broadband penetration, and length of time
in which most people have had internet access, are
associated with greater online risks, but not greater
online activities among children – this suggests that, while
children are motivated to use the internet everywhere
in Europe, higher quality access is bringing more risks
than are adequately dealt with by policymakers (whether
industry, state or education).

•

In countries with 15+ years of schooling on average,
children are more likely to have better digital skills, as are
children from countries where more schools use computers
in the classroom. Education clearly has a positive role to
play in supporting digital skills, literacies and citizenship,
and should be supported across all countries.

COMPARISONS WITHIN AND ACROSS COUNTRIES

EU kids online report

Recomendados

Recomendados

Mais conteúdo relacionado

Mais procurados

Mais procurados (20)

Destaque

Destaque (20)

Semelhante a EU kids online report

Semelhante a EU kids online report (20)

Mais de nctcmedia12

Mais de nctcmedia12 (20)

Último

Último (20)

EU kids online report